RAVINDER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court challenging order dated 18.2.2017 whereby an application filed by petitioner/accused under Section 311 Cr.P.C., 1973 seeking recalling of PW-8 Dr. Jyoti Khosia, has been declined.

(2.) The petitioner is facing trial for an offence under Sections 304, 120B IPC. The prosecution during the course of trial had examined Dr. Jyoti Khosia, who had rendered her opinion regarding the cause of death. The said witness was duly cross-examined on behalf of the accused as on 22.7.2016. Subsequently, an application dated 24.1.2017 (Annexure P-2) was moved under Section 311 Cr.P.C., 1973 on behalf of the accused seeking recalling of the aforesaid witness, when the matter was fixed at the stage of recording defence evidence. The said application was however, declined by the learned trial Court vide order dated 18.2.2017, which has been impugned by the accused by way of filing the present petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that some important questions were required to be put to the Doctor in respect of the alleged cause of death and that the term "Vasovagal syncope " was required to be explained by the Doctor and that since the same has not been done the same has adversely affected the case of the accused while seriously prejudicing him. Learned counsel has further submitted that the powers under Section 311 Cr.P.C., 1973 are very wide and any witness can be duly recalled if the same be for substantial justice and for affording proper opportunity to the accused to defend his case.